Jan 19, 2013 | Criminal Defense, Drug Crimes and Controlled Substances Defense, Felony Drug Possession, Possession with Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance, Uncategorized
A man and woman were arrested this week after trying to fill fraudulent prescriptions for Oxycodone and Adderall at Rock Hill pharmacies, according to Rock Hill Police reports. Narcotics investigators were advised that a man and a woman dropped off fraudulent prescriptions at the Walgreens on Cherry Road and the CVS on Celanese Road on Wednesday, said the commander of York County’s Drug Enforcement Unit.
Police arrested the man and woman at a Rock Hill CVS, the reports state. In addition to trying to obtain “trafficking amounts” of Oxycodone, Brown said, they had other drugs with them in Rock Hill, along with Oxycodone. Rock Hill officers found the man and woman with 18 units of Alprazolam, “with the intent to distribute,” the report states.
Police also confiscated a blank prescription pad and $6,212 in cash incident to the arrest of the two. The man and woman are each charge
d with possession with intent to distribute near a school Oxycodone and Alprazolam, trafficking Oxycodone and possession of a prescription pad, according to police.
Criminal drug charges bring hardship and stress to any person. If you or someone you know is dealing with drug charges in North or South Carolina, contact the law offices of Reeves, Aiken, and Hightower, LLP to consult with one of our criminal attorneys. We have criminal attorneys who want to help you and who handle many other types of criminal cases. We are licensed in both North and South Carolina, where you can contact us at 704-499-9000 or 877-374-5999 toll-free.
Jan 18, 2013 | Burglary/Robbery/Larceny, Criminal Defense, Uncategorized
Gastonia Police are charging two individuals in a case of larceny and attempted fraud with a credit card.
A Gastonia woman reported four of her credit cards stolen on Dec. 18, and suspects attempted to use the stolen credit cards that same day at Target on Cox Road, where their images were captured on surveillance video, according to the Gastonia Police Department.
If you or someone you know has criminal charges being brought against them in North or South Carolina, contact the law offices of Reeves, Aiken, and Hightower, LLP to consult with one of our criminal attorneys. We handle many different types of criminal cases, including but not limited to, drug related offenses, driving under the influence (DUI), and robbery. Our criminal attorneys want to help you or someone you know with the difficulties you may encounter with your case. We are licensed in both North Carolina and South Carolina, where you can contact us at 704-499-9000 or 877-374-5999 toll-free.
Jan 18, 2013 | Car Accidents, DUI & DWI, Felony DUI, Personal Injury, Uncategorized
Officers are still recovering in the hospital after being struck by impaired drivers in separate incidents at the same location last night.
The first incident happened on Saturday night around 11:30 when two officers from the Providence Division Reinke and Wassenaar were outbound on Independence at Eastway Drive working the scene of a vehicular accident when an intoxicated driver failed to heed the officer’s emergency lights and struck both officers. The second incident happened at about 2:00 a.m. when another office of the Eastway Division was on scene to handle traffic from the previous accident and was struck while in his patrol car by a separate intoxicated driver. Both drivers are being charged with felony serious injury by vehicle and DWI.
Any type of DWI case is a serious matter. Contact the law offices of Reeves, Aiken, and Hightower, LLP to consult with a criminal attorney about any robbery charges. Our DWI attorneys want to help you or someone you might know with his/her DWI case. We also handle other various different types of criminal cases in North Carolina and South Carolina. We are licensed in both North Carolina and South Carolina, where you can contact us at 704-499-9000 or 877-374-5999 toll-free.
Jan 18, 2013 | Criminal Defense, Drug Crimes and Controlled Substances Defense, Felony Drug Possession, Possession with Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance, Uncategorized
Four men were arrested on drug charges after a joint investigation into a multi-county drug operation, according to the Union County Sheriff’s Office. Detectives with the Union County Sheriff’s Office arrested three men in the county, charging them with trafficking controlled substances and felony conspiracy. A fourth man was arrested in Moore County, deputies said.
Wednesday night, the Moore County Sheriff’s office contacted authorities in Union County after an undercover drug investigation there led to the arrest of a man from Union County. Subsequently, Moore County officers provided Union County deputies with evidence of drug trafficking occurring at two residences from this arrest. Authorities searched a home in Monroe Wednesday night, gathering information and seizing drug paraphernalia in the process. A similar search was conducted simultaneously on a residence in Marshville, where Sheriff’s Deputies took two men into custody and seized over one pound of crystal methamphetamine, $8,975 in cash, three handguns, and one rifle.
As the investigation continued to unfold overnight, officers were led to draw a search warrant for a third residence located north of Marshville, the report states. Officers seized 745 lbs. of marijuana and four firearms at this residence and took one man into custody there as well. If you or a loved one has been charged with a drug crime, cont act the law offices of Reeves, Aiken, and Hightower to consult with a criminal attorney about these charges. We understand the hardship that accompanies any criminal case. Our criminal attorneys know your rights and want to help you or someone you might know with his/her drug related charges in North or South Carolina. We are licensed in both North Carolina and South Carolina, where you can contact us at 704-499-9000 or 877-374-5999 toll-free.
Jan 18, 2013 | Burglary/Robbery/Larceny, Criminal Defense, Uncategorized
Police in Charlotte, NC have arrested a man and a woman after police say the two hit a store clerk with a hammer during an armed robbery.
On Thursday, at approximately 1 a.m., patrol officers were dispatched to the Circle K located at 9221 Albemarle Rd., concerning an armed robbery call for service, according to a news release from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department. The store clerk stated a male suspect entered the store, threatened him with a hammer, and demanded money. The clerk complied, and the suspect left the store before getting into the passenger seat of a waiting car that was being operated by a female suspect.
A short time later, an officer stopped the vehicle at a Kangaroo gas station located at 7035 E. W.T. Harris Rd. The clerk was brought to the scene where he confirmed both the male and female as the two who drove off together from the Circle K. Officers took the two suspects into custody and each was charged with armed robbery. Contact the law offices of Reeves, Aiken, and Hightower, LLP to consult with a criminal attorney about any robbery charges. Our criminal attorneys want to help you or someone you might know with his/her robbery charges. Our criminal attorneys also handle other various different types of criminal cases. We are licensed in both North Carolina and South Carolina, where you can contact us at 704-499-9000 or 877-374-5999 toll-free.
Jan 18, 2013 | Personal Injury, Uncategorized
Discussion of hot coffee cases has cooled down considerably in past years, despite the recent film Hot Coffee. Hopefully that will remain the case even after a recent Virginia complaint where a “drive-through” customer at a Virginia Beach Burger king suffered third degree burns after she was handed a cup of coffee inside of a bag. These hot coffee cases tend to make bigger news than cases like medical malpractice, defective products, or serious car accidents where liability is more widely accepted by the public. This is unfortunate because hot coffee cases are precisely where proponents of tort reform would like to wage the battle for public opinion.
Most would agree that it is, at least initially, a little counter-intuitive to find negligence in serving hot coffee, or to find hot coffee to be a defective product (but since when do we expect the law to be intuitive). However, after considering that many of the chains require that coffee be kept at temperatures between 180º-190ºF and that 180ºF is hot enough to cause third degree burns in as little as 2 seconds, one could conclude that it may not be prudent or reasonably safe to serve “drive-through” customers coffee that could cause serious injury.
Reasonable people differ on this. People argue variously:
- that coffee, to retain its characteristic flavor and aroma, must be served at high temperatures (generally the argument is temperatures 150°F or above) at which third degree burns would still happen in a matter of seconds (no safer alternative);
- that coffee must be given to the customer at temperatures far exceeding the desirable drinking temperature to allow customers to stir in sugar or creamer and to allow drive-through customers to pick up coffee and still have hot coffee when they get where they’re going (no safer alternative);
- that people when they order hot coffee expect coffee capable of causing severe burns, not just burnt tongues (assumption of risk);
- that all food above 140°F pose burn risks, and thus people when they buy food should check its temperature before consuming (assumption of risk);
- that the stern warnings are enough (an adequate warning renders a defective product not defective).
Responses to these arguments, generally attack necessity and point out restaurants could do more to make the coffee safer, e.g. by using more secure cups, better insulated cups to keep coffee warm longer, or serving coffee at the minimum effective temperature instead of at temperatures as high as 190°F.
The fundamental theoretical question is to what extent individuals should bear the risk of being careful with the food they order and to what extent people in the business of selling hot food should protect their customers.
The legal bottom line is that if someone is seriously injured by hot coffee, and they didn’t do anything stupid (like try to pour hot coffee into a different container over their lap or try to open the cup while driving), they’ll likely be able to prove negligence or product liability in a lot of jurisdictions.
